Cutthroat cooperation: The effects of team role decisions on adaptation to alternative reward structures

Structural Adaptation Theory proposes that it is more difficult for teams to change from competitive to cooperative reward conditions than it is for them to change in the opposite direction, and this has been labeled the cutthroat cooperation effect [Johnson, M. D., Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Humphrey, S. E., Meyer, C. J., & Jundt, D. K. (2006). Cutthroat cooperation: Asymmetrical adaptation of team reward structures. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 103–120]. The current study investigated whether team role discussion can neutralize this effect and promote successful adaptation from competitive to cooperative reward structures. Consistent with our predictions, in a study that involved 75 four-person teams performing a complex task under cooperative reward conditions, we found that teams with a history of competitive rewards performed worse than teams with a history of cooperative rewards in a control condition. However, this effect was neutralized when teams allocated their roles in a team role discussion. This neutralization effect was driven by behavioral coordination and unmet expectations regarding conflict.     

Virtual team leadership: The effects of leadership style and communication medium on team interaction styles and outcomes

This study investigated the effects of transformational and transactional leadership styles and communication media on team interaction styles and outcomes. Teams communicated through one of the following three ways: (a) face-to-face, (b) desktop videoconference, or (c) text-based chat. Results indicated that transformational and transactional leadership styles did not affect team interaction styles or outcomes; that the mean constructive interaction score was higher in FTF than videoconference and chat teams, but not significantly higher in videoconference than chat teams; and that teams working in richer communication media did not achieve higher task performance than those communicating through less rich media. Finally, mean team cohesion scores were higher in FTF and videoconference than chat teams, but not significantly higher in FTF than videoconference teams. These results provide further evidence that communication media do have important effects on team interaction styles and cohesion.     

Bounded Ornstein-Uhlenbeck models for two-choice time controlled tasks

The Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (O-U) model has been successfully applied to describe the response accuracy and response time in 2-alternative choice tasks. This paper analyses properties and performance of variants of the O-U model with absorbing and reflecting boundary conditions that limit the range of possible values of the integration variable. The paper focuses on choice tasks with pre-determined response time. The type of boundary and the growth/decay parameter of the O-U model jointly determine how the choice is influenced by the sensory input presented at different times throughout the trial. It is shown that the O-U models with two types of boundary are closely related and can achieve the same performance under certain parameter values. The value of the growth/decay parameter that maximizes the accuracy of the model has been identified. It is shown that when the boundaries are introduced, the O-U model may achieve higher accuracy than the diffusion model. This suggests that given the limited range of the firing rates of integrator neurons, the neural decision circuits could achieve higher accuracy employing leaky rather than linear integration in certain tasks. We also propose experiments that could distinguish between different models of choice in tasks with pre-determined response time.     

Measuring trust in teams: Development and validation of a multifaceted measure of formative and reflective indicators of team trust

This article describes the development and validation of a multidimensional instrument designed to measure trust within teams. Trust is conceptualized as a latent variable resulting from distinct but related (formative) indicators, i.e., propensity to trust and perceived trustworthiness, which lead to (reflective) indicators, i.e., behaviours cooperation and monitoring between team members. The instrument was tested in two different samples. The first sample included 98 hospital professionals (14 teams) and provided data for the exploratory factor analysis of this instrument (Study 1). The second sample included responses from 112 teams (395 individuals) from three social-care institutions and was used to apply confirmatory factor analysis (Study 2). Data attesting to the underlying factor structure, internal homogeneity, construct validity, and consensual power of agreement within teams and discriminant power across teams of the instrument are presented. The final 21-item, four-factor version of this measure demonstrates good psychometric properties, with acceptable levels of reliability and validity. We conclude that the scales form a parsimonious, valid, and efficient instrument to assess trust in teams. Potential applications of this measure in research and practice are described and the implications of these findings for future research are discussed.